I don't trust him with ANY SMALL MAMMAL

Big Brothers Big Sisters is going to screen out this fool.....1st he is falsely defining co-parenting.....usually refers to blended families and marriage with step children....2nd he insulted women via "health issues"....last this freak knows nothing about deadly pregnancy risks.....maternal death is high statistically inside USA....future children deserve the well planned health and home of both parents to be.....this creep should consider vasectomy even after ACE grades in child psychology child development early childhood education and basic Mazlovian SELF ACTUALIZATION.... his sperm is likely as stupid as his question to us Atheists and Agnostics

@GreenAtheist

You're right, of course. I let it touch a nerve and over-reacted. Thank you.

@Lauren trolls are varied like rapists....why they target any innocent person is all about control....I refuse to validate any concept that betrays human rights and Feminist Atheism....my nerves have been on edge ever since my Vietnam War "training" 1972 with concussive tinnitus conductive hearing loss....war is loud and PAINFULLY dishonest

@ToolGuy Yes, that can be so, however who knows it may be the best thing that has happened to the child and the best thing for the person who does the fostering too. It all has to start somewhere.

It sounds horribly poorly thought out. And the fact that he's "made 3 attempts" already is terrifying. I'd recommend he become a foster brother in Big Brothers association of he just wants to be partially involved in a child's life.

I'm even wondering "troll?" at this point, since he addresses our community as " you agnostics", as if we're a bunch of drones who group-think and he's not "one of us."

@LisaFultonave I was thinking about a foster care idea - I've known some very successful cases.

Who could harm a boy that way to grow tall adultly against children and their mothers ?

The interesting thing about your and other comments is that there seems to be a clinging to of the faith-based notion that there are “baby souls” floating around in heaven, just waiting to be sent down to Earth to be raised by some designated parents (a recent Garth Brooks song reflected this territory). People shouldn’t abstain from doing this because the child “deserves": the child wouldn’t even exist if such an agreement wasn’t executed. I think about couples who were “only going to have three kids”, and then had an “accident”; or even people who conceive in hopes to get a marrow match for treating their existent child’s cancer. Or even John Travolta and Kelly Preston having another child after their oldest child died unexpectedly; there are inevitably people who have something tacky to say about all these choices or “mistakes”.

I have hemophilia, and I know there’s a big portion of parents who will get prenatal testing in order to abort any “malfunctioning” fetuses; but I would rather be alive with hemophilia than never conceived in the first place, and I know that I wouldn’t have “popped up in another family” had my mother aborted me, like some theists cleave to believing. Similarly, I was raised by a single parent, and in my opinion (contrary to GreenAtheist’s attacks), I turned out okay without two parents. Some of you mentioned fostering, and I have had foster children before; this ideal of having two parents produce them out of a relationship didn’t turn out very ideally, but the boys were very resilient, as many children who’ve gone through adverse experiences can happen to be. I don’t wish they hadn’t been conceived because of their parents’ imperfections; and I firmly believe they can succeed in life and be excellent parents when the time comes.

Even traditional male/female couples can be subject to shaming for using surrogacy and fertility treatments; it’s “God’s will/nature’s will” that they can’t do it, so it's felt they should either foster, adopt, or find something else to do with the rest of their lives. (I was actually told the latter by one of the counselors at my hemophilia clinic during my surrogacy attempts, which is terribly ironic because my getting HIV came from my hemophilia medicine prescribed by the very same clinic). And then there are gay people who conceive either by sperm donation or using one partner or the other’s sperm or egg; most of these children too wouldn’t exist if their orientation hadn’t manifested as it did, so there’s no reason for the faithful's handwringing about “oh that poor child, if only they’d been born to a heterosexual couple.”. “They’ll be bullied for having two moms or two dads”; alas, children from man/woman activity also get bullied for various reasons.

With apologies to those who didn’t flame my question (and me personally), I have the answer to my original question, in that the agnostic community appears to be as equally hostile to the notion as the community at large. It’s clear that quite a few agnostics can be just as vitriolic in asserting their beliefs as those of-faith often are.

@AntiTheist wrong again, a child has material and parental needs. The way you described coparenting didn't consider these ergo my comment. Which is not flaming anyone. In this forum people may agree and or disagree, mine obviously disagrees. That is not vitriol nor is it flaming. If you want everybody to agree with a subject tbat is controversial then you are in the wrong site and you are making assumptions that are absolutely incorrect and unreasonable.

"Wrong again" sounds like you want everyone to agree with you (particularly me!). Ironically, I wasn't accusing you of vitriol and flaming; just remarking on the concept of "the child" being something that exists without human intervention and choice. If I had my detractors' ideal committed relationship with a woman in a shared home for 18 years and 9 months, that would be a completely different child than the one who would be conceived out of two parties' agreement to co-parent. The average one night stand doesn't evolve into a two-decade two-parent relationship either, so I presume you feel sorry for those children too. I again stand on my assertion that the children of single parents aren't deprived and can grow up just fine; and that can be with either the father or the mother. In some instances, even in divorce a child can end up with two mothers and two fathers who all contribute equally to the child's life and successes. What I want in a site is one that's not pollyannish; but I have amply seen the roots of religion still flowing through the bloodstreams of many of the people I've heard from so far. Just FYI, I won't be returning to this thread, since I had my answer previously; that's not a whiny, I want the last word tantrum, it's just to let you know that if you respond, you'll just be talking to your supporters.

@AntiTheist i was bored with your long replies, didn't really finish it. Brevity is a virtue.

@Jacar, I think you meant it joshingly but I kind of saw this in action and it was quite interesting. Neighbors up the street had three boys, she (or both, I don't know) had an affair and became pregnant. They divorced, but they kept the boys in the house they grew up in, stayed in the same school, had the same neighborhood friends. The parents got an apartment nearby, and they each would switch off living in the house with the kids. I was in awe that they made this work.